Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica had massive empires, yet dedicated military architecture seems confined mostly to city centers, why didn't they have anything akin to forts in their territory?
Native American empires ruled through extensive feudalization of territory. The emperor only ruled his capital and immediate surroundings himself, for he didn't have the necessary bureaucracy to centrally manage a vast swathe of land. He delegated this to vassals. The reason these feudal polities were called "empires" is because they frequently conquered other ethnic groups and cultures as tributary states. These lands would "obey" the overlord in the sense that they would offer up to him whatever tribute he demanded, would allow his armies to supply in their cities, would provide other support in war, but were otherwise not really under the direct governance of the overlord. Again, the lack of a large centralized bureaucracy kept these "emperors" from truly administrating everything. Now, that said, they absolutely could have still insisted on building fortifications throughout all the territory they claimed as part of the empire, but with a feudal structure that is usually a terrible idea. Because who is going to be the ones actually manning and maintaining those fortresses? Your vassals. In other words, you're giving your vassals strong fortifications which could be used to resist their enemies... which includes you, if they decide to rebel.Just ask the Kings of England about how wise a policy it is to allow the country barons to build huge castles.
No horses, no large armies gathering from afar.
>>18399286I wonder if that was from lessons learned the hard way or it was decentralized they didn't try
>>18399293Well, building fortresses is very expensive and time consuming. It only becomes more expensive and time consuming the further away the project is from the people who are planning it. So nobody built large fortifications without a very good reason, such as planning a war, or expecting war to come to them and wanting to be prepared. But Native emperors probably didn't care about this outside their own, personal holdings. Their capital city and its surrounding land were the base of their power. That land fed his people and provided his warriors with their upkeep, and his warriors were the main way he enforced his rule. It makes sense he'd want to protect these things from being damaged. But foreign invasion? He'd simply send word to his vassals to gather and resist the enemy while he formed up his army then go meet them in the field. The emperor commanded the most powerful army in the region by definition so he wasn't really afraid of a foreign invader, he WAS the foreign invader as fr as everyone outside his domain was concerned.No, the main thing he feared was rebellion. In that view, building fortifications in vassal territory made little sense.
>>18399223Andeans did build forts though
>>18399421
>>18399424
>>18399427
>>18399434
>>18399439
>>18399434>>18399439What kind of arms would the defenders have had in a siege?
>>18399442bronze maces (normally star shaped), axes (or a combination of a star shaped mace + axe like pic related), spears, slings, bows
>>18399454their maces had many different shapes
>>18399441Inca village with wall
>>18399458Sacsayhuaman is probably the most famous precolumbian fortress
>>18399460
I'll only see you as human if your culture had stone architecture. Simple as!
>>18399461
>>18399463also in the case of mesoamerica some of their cities were built to be defensive structures by using steep hills and terraces in their layout, an example being la quemada
>>18399467I can also see some of the pyramid complexes being used as defensive structures for the elites, I know mayans also built defensive walls
>>18399223they did though
>>18399471And lastly this is one of the last remaning aztec structures, the defensive wall of huexotla
>>18399474
>>18399223>Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica had massive empires,lmao what?
>>18399462>TIL pre modern Japan and Iran had no human culture
They did have forts, you just have to remember that an overwhelming majority of native buildings were torn down by the Spanish, and symbols of native pride like forts, temples, and monuments were especially targeted. iirc the borders between the Tarascans and Tlaxcalans and the Aztecs had a lot of forts
>>18399421>>18399424>>18399427>>18399434>>18399439>>18399441He said Mesoamerica not general native americans. But can you please tell me the names of those sites so i can research them?
Bumping so I can reply to stuff when I have time
>>18399223They weren't empires that's something that low IQ 16th century spics made up. They were tributary tribal polities similar to early bronze age city states. There was no need for forts because they had vassals everywhere to maintain their control.
>>18399223>why didn't they have anything akin to forts in their territory?You might've heard of this one.
>>18402053Machu Picchu isn't in mesoamerica
>>18402086Like half of this thread is people getting Mesoamerica and the Andes confused for each other
>>18399473big if true
>>18399223Mesoamericans depended uniquely on farming more than any other civilization on earth. Their lack of livestock guided their political class to make war while leaving more priviledges to farmers. The andes, having livestock, could mobilize and protect their riches and food behind walls and fortifications.
>>18399421>>18399424>>18399427>>18399434>>18399439>>18399441I wonder what pre-Colombian South American conflict looked like. Aztec/Mexica war is talked about extensively at least in pop-history, but judging from these pictures the South American civilizations did a lot more of the actual fighting.
>>18401974If one city states rules over the others, how is that not an empire? It's a king over another king
>>18399291/thread
>>18405077It was rad as fuck. Big highly disciplined armies fighting with religious fervor and lots of cool sieges. Much like Mesoamerica they had god tier crops for portable meals so they were able to launch lots of huge, long lasting campaigns.
>>18399456>>18399454i've heard mixed things about how often the andeans actually used metal weapons like this and if they were ceremonial or not
>>18406090Empires spread their language, laws, and ways of life. The Mexica just treated conquered people like cattle. They weren't looking to create an imperium of Nahuatl speaking provinces.
>>18408388They kinda did tho, by then most of Mesoamerica already either natively spoke Nahuatl in virtue of being a Nahua-conquered/founded city-state themselves or due to its status as a lingua franca and prestige language that stemmed from how widespread and successful Nahua people were, something that the Mexica's success of course also ended up contributing to>just treated conquered people like cattle.Not really
>>18408315the sheer number of purely ceremonial metal weapons would mean that it'd be ridiculous for there NOT to have been tons of metal weapons for war>>18408388The Mexica spread their culture and religion by improving the lives of their subject states to show the superiority of the Mexica way of life. Sure they were hands off in that they didn't just replace foreign leaders and take total control of their administration but it was definitely important to them that their subjects saw them as cultured and powerful
>>18407320Those weird star-mace-scythe things look painful.>>18408496>Most of MesoamericaThat's an exaggeration. While there were Nahuatls as far as south as Nicaragua, south of guerrero iirc most peoples did not speak Nahuatl.
>>18408885>Those weird star-mace-scythe things look painful.I can't really be more specific as I'm not a mesoamerica autist but I'd recommend looking up macanas, as that was the umbrella term that the Spanish used for basically any melee weapon that didn't resemble a sword - maces, clubs, curved sticks, whatever.
>>18409095THEYRE NOT FUCKING MESOAMERICAN THEYRE ANDEANENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONTINENTLEARN THE DIFFERENCE
>>18409810>>18409095>>18401009>>18402950They aren't even close to one another
